8089 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Impacts If no action is taken, goals for recovering endangered fish would not be met, and the Recovery Program would not offset impacts of water development and use on endangered species. This could affect permitting of future water activities and/or lead to more stringent constraints being placed on existing water uses within the Gunnison Basin. FIsh Passageway and Interim Water Agreement- The fish passageway will have no direct effect on river flows, water rights, or water uses. Provision of flows under the interim agreement, however, will have effects on river flows and could affect water uses. Water rights will not be affected, although the water supply historically used under these rights could change. The interim water agreement would be implemented under Colorado water laws and would not interfere with the purposes of the Aspinall Unit. As stated earlier in the report, the purpose of the Recovery Program is to recover the endangered fish while allowing water use and development to continue. Hydrology studies were conducted to determine impacts of providing and protecting flows to the fish under the interim water agreement alternatives. Gunnison River flows, Blue Mesa Reservoir storage, water rights and use, and river administration were considered. The studies covered the period from 1973 to 1994. Historic data on streamflows and reservoir storage was compiled for the No Action alternative, and was then used to identify what flows and storage levels would have resulted under the terms of the agreement alternatives. Detailed tables of monthly flows and reservoir levels are included in Appendix E. The studies also indicate months when a "call" would occur on the river under the different alternatives (tables are also contained in Appendix E). General Interaction of Effects - During public meetings (initial scoping, review of the draft EA, and water agreement negotiations) the most frequently expressed concern with the interim agreement was -- how would existing water uses be affected? As initially proposed, the interim agreement (as represented by Alternative C) would have provided protected releases from the Aspinall Unit to maintain desired fish flows of at least 300 cfs below Redlands during the months of July through October. No consideration was given to keeping downstream senior water rights whole during this period. In the remainder of the year (November through June), no provision for maintaining desired fish flows below Redlands was included. Alternatives A and B were developed to address concerns over possible impacts to existing water users. Their development followed a review of water assignment contracts, decrees, and authorizing legislation of the Aspinall Unit. Under these alternatives, releases from the Aspinall Unit would be planned to continue historic supply conditions to downstream users and meet desired flow levels below the Redlands Diversion on a year round basis to the extent that water availability allows. 19